The percentage of cases decided by a 5-to-4 or a 5-to-3 vote was 14 percent, compared to an average since 1946 of 22 percent. [Using] another measure of consensus, dividing the number of votes in support of the majority or plurality opinion by the total number of votes cast. . . . last term’s rate, 89 percent, was the highest in at least 70 years.
- NY Times, June 27, 2017

“The suggestion that [this case] will somehow obliterate the ‘wall of separation’ [between church and state] ignores the many ways in which government funding already benefits religious institutions through tax benefits, grants, partnerships, even police and fire services,” -Washington Post, June 26, 2017

John Inazu, Sally D. Danforth Distinguished Professor of Law & Religion and Professor of Political Science (by courtesy)

“Given all of President Trump’s public promises of a Muslim ban, it is hard to imagine a clearer case of governmental action motivated by animus toward a single religion than the executive order here. This act of hostility and prejudice toward a religion cannot stand under the First Amendment of the Constitution.” -June 26, 2017

“The Supreme Court has removed a very valuable tool that pharma companies can use to segment markets. We may think that’s a good policy outcome in the US, but we’re very concerned about the impact abroad.” -STAT, May 30, 2017

"If one of them were to leave before the 2018 elections and Trump appoints another Gorsuch, the result is likely the most conservative court in at least eight decades. That's the filibuster-less result, and the one Republicans are banking on."–USA Today, April 8, 2017

"Of all the judges President Trump could have nominated, Gorsuch seems to me as good as anybody, liberal or conservative, who would stand up to unlawful actions by the Trump administration, if need be."–The Christian Science Monitor, Feb.10, 2017

“A free press, street protests and activist students. This is what the First Amendment was designed to do. It’s not just designed to keep the government from doing bad things. It’s designed to keep the government from doing bad things for a reason. And the reason is so we have a vital, politically informative, diverse, contentious and ultimately productive public discourse.”

"Scholars have long attributed the success of the executive branch to the quality of its lawyers. But the emergence of a specialized Supreme Court bar full of former solicitors general and other government lawyers may be offsetting the president’s traditional advantage."–New York Times, Jan. 23, 2017

In this episode of First Mondays, Dan Epps and Ian Samuel interview New York Times Supreme Court Reporter Adam Liptak, recap the latest arguments, and discuss the problem of lawyers who won’t give up their arguments to more experienced counsel.

"At the very least, the four liberal Justices will be pretty gun shy now and for the foreseeable future on granting cases, given the expectation that President-elect Donald Trump will nominate a conservative to fill the vacancy." –Bloomberg BNA, Jan. 12, 2017

"It’s actually hard to know where Sotomayor and Kagan fall. Sotomayor and Kagan appear to be disloyal, voting in favor of Obama only around 50 percent of the time when the average is close to 66 percent." –Huffington Post, Jan. 3, 2017

In this inaugural episode of First Mondays, Ian Samuel and Dan Epps raise the curtain on the new term, discussing the most exciting grants and previewing the most important cases set for argument on the Court’s October calendar. —First Mondays podcast, Oct. 3, 2016

"The ruling is significant in really protecting our First Amendment. I think it matters in that way because we saw a lot of state legislatures discussing adoption of bills just like Mississippi's or some variation upon it." –Associated Press, July 1, 2016

"Justice Stephen Breyer especially noted the scientific evidence backing that the regulations had no health benefits for women, calling it a win for evidence-based medicine." –Joplin Globe, June 30, 2016

"A critical part of today’s analysis showed that Texas, which tried to justify its restrictions as health measures, had imposed significant obstacles to abortion access without evidence that health benefits were gained or were even needed."

"Without Scalia, it’s still the Kennedy court, but Kagan and Breyer had a very good term. Both were in the majority in divided cases over 80 percent of the time, and the Democratic side of the court yet again won victories in some of the term’s biggest cases." –New York Times, June 28, 2016

"I certainly think the Supreme Court decision makes it more difficult for Hillary to take some of the steps, if she were to take them. It’s now going to be very hard for Obama or his successor to expand on what they’ve already done. It’s a tough row to hoe." –Politico, June 25, 2016

"The court’s decision allows two exceptionally conservative judges who sit on one regional court, of the plaintiffs’ choosing, to substitute their personal policy preferences for those of a democratically elected president."

"Since 2010, we have had a prohibition on discrimination on the basis of sex in health care. We never had that before. Sex discrimination was not prohibited in the health-care system." –The Atlantic, May 15, 2016

"The Supreme Court, for more than 100 years, has consistently held that immigration is exclusively a federal responsibility. No one individual state should be allowed to disrupt federal immigration policy." –Agence France Presse, April 17, 2016

"Political science research shows that Americans are less likely to support the court when it is portrayed as a political body — as it is during confirmation proceedings — and not a legal body." –New York Times, March 23, 2016

"These credentials (Judge Garland's experience on an appeals court, as a law clerk and on the executive branch ) aren't required, nor would most former justices have met them, but they reflect the new normal." –New York Times, March 16, 2016

"At-risk precedents run from campaign finance to commerce, from race to religion, and they include some signature Scalia projects such as the Second Amendment. Some would go quickly, some would go slower, but they'll go." –Fox News, Feb. 21, 2016

"There’s no question that TV has had an effect.The first day of the hearings is devoted to the opening statement of the senators. We have an entire day of speeches. Much of that is on the issues. Some is on candidates." –Wall Street Journal, Feb. 19, 2016

"I continue to think that Justice Scalia’s passing is unlikely to affect the outcome of this specific case. But it clearly reduces the chance of a precedent adverse to the government, because a precedent requires the votes of at least five justices." –Law360, Feb. 16, 2016

"Justice Scalia actually made an affirmative case that corporations are important and should be heard in the political process because of their economic power and significance." –Marketplace, Feb. 15, 2016

"The regulation lists a handful of reasons for which pharmacies may reject prescriptions and disallows any other reason—which could include religious objections or personal beliefs or preferences, for example." –Modern Healthcare, Feb. 8, 2016

"Accepting Texas’s radical theory of standing would be a recipe for paralysis. No one state should be empowered to thwart the federal government’s nationwide policy decisions so easily. And that is why the consequences of the Court’s final disposition will be so profound." –The Huffington Post, Jan. 21, 2016

"But the most sweeping impact of the Court's decision will be how it rules on whether Texas has standing even to bring the lawsuit. Texas will have to show that DAPA would harm it in some concrete way." –The Washington Post, Jan. 19, 2016

"Judge Garland is the kind of nominee we haven’t seen since President Bill Clinton nominated Stephen Breyer more than two decades ago: a veteran appellate judge with a reputation for centrism and pragmatism, a nominee who doesn’t excite the president’s political base and a relatively old nominee."

"Male judges were less likely than female judges to decide in favor of plaintiffs in cases of sex discrimination and that male judges are significantly more likely to rule for plaintiffs in such cases when a female judge is on the panel." –The National Law Journal, Jan. 11, 2016

"Later this month, the Supreme Court will hear a case involving convoluted facts and small-town politics. This odd case out of Paterson, N.J., could have a significant impact on the basic First Amendment freedoms of all Americans." –USA Today, Jan. 10, 2016

John Inazu, Sally D. Danforth Distinguished Professor of Law & Religion and Professor of Political Science (by courtesy)

"Personal stories from female attorneys might be an effective strategy both from legal and emotional standpoints. Their stories bear witness to the court's opinion in a previous abortion case, Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, that women's equal participation in society depends on their access to abortion." –Modern Healthcare, Jan. 7, 2016

"Twice in the last decade, the Supreme Court has stressed that the Second Amendment right is “not unlimited” and that it is “not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose." –The Huffington Post, Jan. 6, 2016

"We’re a long way from pastors being forced to perform civil ceremonies, and there are strong constitutional protections already in place that would prevent that from happening." –Christianity Today, June 29, 2015

John Inazu, Sally D. Danforth Distinguished Professor of Law & Religion and Professor of Political Science (by courtesy)

"Ever since Lawrence v. Texas was decided in 2003, the treatment of same-sex couples under state marriage law has been inconsistent with the logical extension of the meaning of the 14th Amendment established in that case."

"The shift to the right in cases where Kagan’s and Sotomayor’s votes can’t make a difference makes them look moderate. A moderate image is attractive to many judges, owing to a general dislike of ‘political’ judges." –The American Prospect, May 5, 2015

"When the ‘mood of the public’ is liberal (conservative), the Court is significantly more likely to issue liberal (conservative) decisions. But why is anyone’s guess." –Bloomberg Politics, Feb. 25, 2015

"We should be glad for Hobby Lobby, but we shouldn't lose sight of the unanimous decision in McCullen, and its reminder that when it comes to the roots of our religious liberty, the First Amendment is what matters the most." –Christianity Today, July 1, 2014

John Inazu, Sally D. Danforth Distinguished Professor of Law & Religion and Professor of Political Science (by courtesy)

"The higher unanimity rate might reflect an increase in cases with low ideological stakes. This term, about 36 percent involved questions of rights and liberties, compared with 57 percent in the three previous terms." –New York Times, July 1, 2014

"The unanimity this term, in my view, really reflects case selection. The fraction of civil liberties cases this term is significantly lower, and the more civil liberties cases, the less likely decisions are to be unanimous." –New Republic, July 1, 2014